THE HYPNOTIZED PEOPLE
313
The obsession of those times can best be seen in the work
of Indians who were then writing in English (with one exception,
Mr. R.
K.
Narayan). Indian novels published abroad before 1947
were essentially political. Their authors were propagandists for the
cause of independence, for the strategy of non-violence and for
the efficacy, not the morality, of passive resistance. Their whole
vocabulary was derived from, and based on, politics. The word
satyagraha,
for example, literally means a search for--or a pro–
found yearning for- truth. But by constant association with politics
there is no more magic left in this word and it is used today
only to categorize a specific device or technique for political pur–
poses. Until independence, therefore, contemporary Indian writ–
ing did not serve as a vehice for adventurous imaginations. It
stands only as a record of a phase in Indian history. Because that
period in history is significant, the writing is also significant; but
because of the very nature of their preoccupations, those writers all
seem to be posing
one
problem of a nation, not the
many
problems
of an individual. Not one Indian--or a type of Indians-but a
whole community
was
the hero.
This emphasis on the community left deep marks on us. One
of them was the need to create and worship living political per–
sonalities or national heroes. And so our politicians and leaders
automatically became repositories of our faith, our hopes and our
values. My generation had three to choose from. It is, again, a
sign of our sloth that we chose the one least likely to embarrass
us, least likely to wrench us out of our opium dream. To begin
with there was Gandhi-a unique phenomenon, a saint. We knew
that we would never measure up to his kind of greatness. Then
there were the uncomprising radicals, like Subhas Chandra Bose.
We did not possess the guts for their kind of extremism and shied
away from them. Finally, Nehru. Here was a social democrat,
adopting Gandhian means for "progressive" ends, a man of let–
ters, a bit of a philosopher, agnostic, emotional, romantic, glam–
orously torn within himself, and for all that a natural sceptre–
and-crown figure. We settled for
him.
It
was not possible for us to conceive of any heroism outside
politics because none existed. Personality cult politics in emergent
states, or in advanced states, reflect the poor quality of artistic
